SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Skybird · 11-12-08, 08:32 AM

Striking at Iran and invading Iran are two separate things.

Agents in warheads, wether they be nuclear or biological, eventually can be delivered by other means as well, and terrorists smuggling these things has always been a greater concern for me. Even a nuclear armed Iran is less the danger, than the possibility - that I take for a certain - that this would mean Iranian proliferation of nukes to factions that you do not wish to see with such a capacity, and it would provoke a nuclear amrs race as well. Saudi Arabia and Egypt would launch their own programs in a reaction to Iran, which is more or less open not only their rival, but enemy. In fct there are clear indications reported since three years that both countries already are at it, especially the Saudis. Thus, the missile test itself should not be overestimated in importance. Wether or not the Iranians are capable to produce these nasty kind of addons for it - that is the decisive question. and while missiles work fast in delivering them, they are not the only carrier option.

If there ever will go off a nuke in the West, it most likely will have entered the country as part of a regular delivery of items of international trade. Maybe it travels by ship, and is declared as a refrigerator. Or it is split into parts and reconstructed in the target country. This danger is far more serious than a dozen of Iranian nuclear missile. and this scenario, and the nuclear arms race it would cause in the ME, is the reason why nukes for Iran shall not be alloweed, at no cost - even at cost of taking the worst case options. I'm already pissed with Pakistan, I do not want to get a second Pakistan which may behave even worse.

11-12-08, 08:32 AM	#6
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,620 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Striking at Iran and invading Iran are two separate things. Agents in warheads, wether they be nuclear or biological, eventually can be delivered by other means as well, and terrorists smuggling these things has always been a greater concern for me. Even a nuclear armed Iran is less the danger, than the possibility - that I take for a certain - that this would mean Iranian proliferation of nukes to factions that you do not wish to see with such a capacity, and it would provoke a nuclear amrs race as well. Saudi Arabia and Egypt would launch their own programs in a reaction to Iran, which is more or less open not only their rival, but enemy. In fct there are clear indications reported since three years that both countries already are at it, especially the Saudis. Thus, the missile test itself should not be overestimated in importance. Wether or not the Iranians are capable to produce these nasty kind of addons for it - that is the decisive question. and while missiles work fast in delivering them, they are not the only carrier option. If there ever will go off a nuke in the West, it most likely will have entered the country as part of a regular delivery of items of international trade. Maybe it travels by ship, and is declared as a refrigerator. Or it is split into parts and reconstructed in the target country. This danger is far more serious than a dozen of Iranian nuclear missile. and this scenario, and the nuclear arms race it would cause in the ME, is the reason why nukes for Iran shall not be alloweed, at no cost - even at cost of taking the worst case options. I'm already pissed with Pakistan, I do not want to get a second Pakistan which may behave even worse. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 11-12-08 at 08:35 AM.